.svg)
After a Nevada legislative session that included the passage of several gaming reform bills, state regulators have begun the process of considering new regulations or amendments to current rules that are required to implement the statutory changes.
First on the rulemaking agenda of the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) are amendments to a regulation that is more than two decades old and governs the operations of private gaming salons, which are operated by non-restricted casino licensees such as the Bellagio or Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas.
Those updates were included within Senate Bill 459, which was signed on May 31 by Republican Governor Joe Lombardo. The law required regulators to amend rules to remove a $500 minimum wager for slot machines in gaming salons within a Nevada casino-resort.
The minimum wager required for slot machines within the gaming salon will now be at the casino operator’s discretion and subject to NGCB approval.
The board's proposed amendments to Regulation 5.200 also will allow gaming salons to offer poker, as well as craps, baccarat, or blackjack.
On Wednesday (August 20), the control board heard testimony from industry representatives supportive of leaving the financial criteria for admission to a salon to the discretion of the casino operator.
The existing regulations creating a separate licensing category for salons date back to 2001, when the state legislature passed Senate Bill 283, permitting casinos to set up private gambling areas for high rollers.
The initial criteria for admission required was $500,000, which was then lowered to $300,0000 in 2008.
Initially, the control board proposed lowering the financial criteria to a $50,000 up-front deposit, a $50,000 line of credit, or a combination of the two for all table games except poker. If a gaming salon offers poker, then the buy-in for each participant will be at least $10,000, but no games can begin with less than a $50,000 total buy-in, according to the proposed amendments.
NGCB chairman Mike Dreitzer agreed with the industry that a “lowered deposit level Is fully justified and substantiated” but as with all things, “its’s a balance.”
“In this process, we certainly need to make sure that the limit set can be regulated effectively to benefit the entire industry in the state,” Dreitzer said.
Virginia Valentine, president of the Nevada Resort Association, urged the three-member control board to remove the financial criteria for admission and leave it to the operator's discretion to set the amount.
“By lowering the minimum from any requirements and offering privacy, security, and an elevated gaming experience, we believe we will attract casino patrons who are not playing here now,” Valentine said. “To the best of our knowledge no other state or tribal entity requires the minimum requirements.”
Valentine also asked that the operator be tasked with establishing the minimum buy-in that makes sense for table games, rather than a required minimum, and if there is a minimum for poker, then the total buy-in could be provided by one player.
“That would allow a poker player (in a salon) to provide the front money and invite his or her guests to play in the salon,” Valentine added.
Dreitzer said he appreciated Valentine’s comments but asked Kristi Torgerson, chief of the NGCB’s enforcement division, how any initiative to remove the financial criteria would affect the board's ability to regulate salons.
“After extensive discussions with the enforcement division staff, I highly recommend a financial threshold of at least $10,000,” Torgerson said. “A financial proposal of $10,000 supports the supervision of private gaming salons at an appropriate level.
“We are used to doing here with less, but this will be a challenge,” Torgerson added.
Board member George Assad initially opposed any effort to keep a financial criteria in place for gaming salons, describing the idea as falling into “ the area of micro managing.” Assad said he believed regulators should get out of operators' way and let them run their businesses.
After two hours of discussion, Assad and member Chandeni Sendall agreed to a compromise put forward by Dreitzer to lower the financial criteria for gaming salons to $20,000, while also allowing casinos to file a request seeking the NGCB chair's approval to lower the amount.
Assad said he would agree to the compromise because it was closer to his goal of “operator discretion.”
“This approach will balance this out without putting too much on enforcement staff,” Dreitzer commented.
Throughout the meeting, Dreitzer expressed confidence in casinos with experience in operating private gaming salons to continue to do so effectively, although he voiced concern that new gaming salons may not have the same operational experience.
“It’s regulation in the light of day,” the chairman added. “They would have the opportunity to earn that discretion.”
The NGCB also unanimously approved reducing the poker buy-in to $20,000, but did not include allowing a single player to put up the entire buy-in. The revised amendments will be referred to the Nevada Gaming Commission for final approval.
